Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Riverside Ward 4 Councilman Paul Davis informed The Truth Publication that City Attorney Greg Priamos had not authority to direct Police Officer Nick Sahagun to stop a speaker if he/she goes over the 3-minutes limit. Officer Sahagun so declared in his report, regarding the incident involving Karen Wright, affirmed Davis. City officials are investigating the case (who are they?) What would happen to CA Priamos if he gave instructions to Officer Sahagun?

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Tuesday, October 30, 2012

The same people who are endorsing William Baily for Mayor at the Riverside Unified School District "found out" that the mayoral candidate didn't do anything wrong during a class calling "crazy ladies" to the women who regularly speak at the City Council meetings. Bailey is a teacher at Poly High School. Activist Viviam Moreno filed the complaint and another one with the city on November 16.(Same result.) THE RIVERSIDE CITY COUNCIL OF TODAYWe cannot cover the sun with a finger. There is bad blood at the Riverside City government between officials and numerous opponents. The Karen Wright incident has made things worse. It will have a tail. Inside the same dais there are lots of frictions and resentments between Council members. Steve Adams and Chris MacArthur were endorsing Ed Adkison. There is a cold war between Councilman Paul Davis and City Attorney Greg Priamos. The Mayor endorsed Bailey and so Gardner, Melendrez, and Paul Davis. Opponents to the government are against Bailey. Melendrez has a son in the RPD Department, so never expects any criticism against it. Nancy Hart, who is retiring, refused to give an opinion. Adams and Davis are like oil and water because Davis endorsed John Brandriff. Gardner will back up Bailey, no matter what. Bailey will face lots of troubles to handle his new job because his lack of experience, although we wish him the best.The City Council is not a very good sight, there is too much blood in the supper. Sooner or later the balloon will explode.

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Friday, October 26, 2012

See in this edition an exclusive interview with Mayor Ron Loveridge, saying Sayonara to City Hall. At the very end of this edition, after the subtitle "Don't Kid Yourself," there are jokes about limited speaking time at different scenarios. It's funny. This edition has 14 pages.AFTER THE MAYORAL ELECTION. Riverside City Clerk Colleen Nicol informs, " The tentative schedule for administering the oath of office to the new Mayor is December 11, depending of the completion of the election canvass by the Registrar. It is up to the Mayor Loveridge to be present or not."

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Since TV Channel 11 presented a one side of the story about the incident that took place at the Riverside City Council meeting of October 23, 2012, Mayor Ron Loveridge and Chief of Police Sergio Diaz released a Communicate through the Intergovernmental & Communication Officer, which includes the new protocol that will be enforced at the City Council meetings. THE MAYOR CALLS FOR DECORUM

Ron Loveridge, Riverside Mayor for 18 years, willretire in November 2012.

Mayor
Ron Loveridge, a proponent for open governance, is working with City
Manager Scott Barber and Chief of Police Sergio Diaz to clarify the
roles and responsibilities of elected officials and staff in carrying
out the decorum rules at public meetings. This follows an incident
this Tuesday involving a regular speaker at Riverside City Council
meetings.

The
Riverside Police Department is preparing a draft policy to provide
response guidelines for the police personnel that staff City Council
meetings.

The
new protocol gives the meeting chair, generally the Mayor or Mayor
Pro Term, the sole authority to have someone removed from a meeting
for violations of decorum. Security issues will be handled by the
Police Department. Mayor Loveridge said, “The City Council and I
continue to encourage public comment as part of our open process”.
He also stated that it wouldn’t have been appropriate to intervene
on Tuesday once the officers took over the situation and that “We
stand behind the officer”.

Chief of Police Sergio Diaz isprotecting his Department.

Chief
Diaz said he is recommending that the protocol include specific
language the presiding officer would read to let the speaker and
police officers know what steps would be taken if the disruption
continues.

The
incident that prompted the new rule occurred at an October 23 City
Council meeting during the evening session. A City Council regular
who routinely disrupts the Council meetings by exceeding speaking
times and violates other meeting rules, such as shouting from the
audience or talking on a cell phone, refused again on this day to
comply with the rules and failed to cooperate with repeated – more
than 16 - requests by the Mayor to bring her comments to a close. She
also refused to comply with requests by a police officer to take her
seat and then to step outside that ultimately resulted in her arrest
and a misdemeanor citation.

The
speaker was released within approximately 15 minutes. She spoke 6
times on October 23 and despite her allegation that she was being
censored, she was allowed to speak 2 additional times following her
citation. The
clarification of protocol will help maintain decorum at the meetings
and allow the Mayor and Council more time to focus on business
issues.

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Ward 4 Riverside Councilman Paul Davis responded to The Truth Publication an inquiry about the incident involving public speaker Karen Wright. He was at the dais then and witnessed the whole episode.

COUNCILMAN PAUL DAVIS: Exclusivecomments about the handcuffing of PublicSpeaker Karen Wright that he witnessed.

Salvador, nice to hear from you. I hope that your health is getting better, and you
can join us again soon.Thank you for the inquiry and your interest in the occurrence with
Ms. Karen Wright at the November 23, 2012 daytime and evening Council
Meetings.I must preface this response
with a statement that I do not condone nor condemn the actions of either Ms.
Wright or the Police officer(s) involved.I am simply to relay what I saw and heard, prior to and after this
unfortunate incident.

During the afternoon session of the Council Meeting and in most
prior meetings, Ms. Wright had consistently disregarded the rules of conduct and
had been previously warned that her continued actions will not be
tolerated.Since Ms. Wright has a clear
issue with authority and believes that no rules apply to her, she has taken it
upon herself to discover how far she can push the limits of the rules
established and administered by the Mayor.

This occasion was no different with a few real serious
exceptions.During the evening session of
the Riverside City Council Meeting, Ms. Wright had spoken and her time limit had
expired.During her speaking period she
was as she normally had been, very outspoken, which I support her ability to say
what she wants exercising her First Amendment Rights.However, after her time had expired and the
Mayor had Thanked her for speaking, telling her that her time had expired, she
proceeded to become rather louder and even more belligerent and engage the Mayor
in a less than cordial manner.After less
than a minute of her continuing her rant, an officer approached her and asked
her to calm down and to have a seat.She
disregarded the officers request and proceeded to march towards the area where
the City Management Staff sits, stating that she was going to put in her
speaking cards, for the speech she just gave, into the bin.Which, under the rules, is to be submitted
prior to speaking and she never does, since Ms. Wright states that she keeps her
notes upon herself and needs them to speak.

The
officer again told her that she needs to be calm, take her seat and she ignored
him.At that time, the officer directed
her to return to her seat and Ms. Wright turned and began to advance towards
where she had been sitting.Ms. Wright
then uttered some choice words to the officer, which may have been directed
towards the council.He then told her to
step outside, since she was clearly disrupting the meeting and she chose to
continue to ignore him.The officer then
took her right arm at the elbow and told her that she needs to accompany him
outside.Ms. Wright then jerked her arm
away from the officer, stating something to the effect that she needed to get
her things and for him not to touch her.

At that time she also decided to sit down, on the floor, just outside the
Dais entrance door and near her seat, with her hands not visible from my vantage
point.Ms. Wright began to holler that
her rights are being violated and would not comply with the officers orders to
stand up and exit the meeting chambers.During that time the officer applied handcuffs to Ms. Wright and later
took them off, after assisting Ms. Wright to her feet.She was then led outside where she was cited
for her disrupting a public meeting.Ms.
Wright later returned to the chambers, but a slight change in her
demeanor.

Many have asked why the members of the Mayor, Council, or city
Staff, did not take any actions to stop the officer from his actions.As a matter of law, no person has the
authority to interfere with the lawful order or actions of a Police Officer
performing his duties.By doing so, you
would be in violation and you will be held for Obstruction of Justice, and be
subject to severe penalty.If the officer
felt that he observed her not complying with the established rules of a Public
Meeting and after being warned, that person fails to comply, he has the
authority to take the appropriate actions he feels necessary to resolve the
issue before him.In this case, he did
so, and no person has the authority to tell him otherwise and would not be
appropriate to do so.The officers
Captain was present and involved with the situation, during the entire
incident.If that officer acted outside
the scope of his authorities, then it is incumbent upon the Internal Affairs and
Police Chief to effect the necessary corrections.We as
the elected body, do not have any authority to get involved in any way, by State
Law and the Charter of this city.Ms.
Wright has and will enjoy the ability to speak her mind at any Public Meeting
and I will always support this.However,
to maintain decorum and civility, the rules that have been established must be
adhered to.Ms. Wright is aware of this,
as I have personally, spoken to her about her conduct at past Council and other
meetings, Public and otherwise.She
chooses to ignore such pleads to maintain composure and decorum and carry on in
the manner she does.Unfortunately for
Ms. Wright, on this occasion, the officer felt that she had clearly stepped
beyond the established line and took the actions he felt was
necessary.

I hope
this helps you to understand the incident and actions taken last Tuesday and
look to you for your comments and this situation. This is simply my
recollection of the events and may not be shared as the same from
others.

CURIOUS STATISTICS REPORTED BY BLOGGER: This edition has had so far 357 hits in the U.S., 34 in Russia, 17 in China, 11 in Sweden, 4 in Mexico, 3 in Germany, 3 in South Africa, 2 in Spain, 2 in France, 2 in the United Kingdom. (!!!!!!!!). This report has greatly surprised us. The Truth is getting more than 3,000 hits every month.______________________________________"I have a question for Mr. Davis. If the city council thinks what happened was officer-initiated and appropriate behavior then why did the mayor tell the Los Angeles Times that the city government is changing that policy and having an expulsion at the discretion of the city council/mayor and not the police? I think the city's preparing its defense and the first thing it does is find city employees to throw under the bus." --- Mary Shelton, Five Before Midnight.

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Admitting Karen Wright has been violating the speaker rules at the City Council meetings, methods of persuasion should have been used before taking the drastic measure of handcuffing and citing her. She wouldn't have been confronting the police is she were told, "we are going to arrest you, if you don't behave." We could disagree with many things she say and do at the chamber, but we have to recognize that she is a dedicated activist deeply involved in city matters.

Public speakers at the City Council meetings are volunteers who don't earn any money, but dedicate their time and efforts to express their opinions in our free country. Rules have to be respected, but also restrain and smart tactics have to be used by the authorities. This one shows Ms Wright on the floor while being handcuffed. The Truth Publication Online states its strongest protest for this action against a woman who is disable and wasn't threatening anybody. The silent and complicity of the members of the dais before this human aberration is very worrisome.

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Photo sent to The Truth Publication Online by Donald Gallegos, showing the moment when Karen Wright was handcuffed whilebeing on her knees on the floor of the City Council chamber.

Regular speaker at the Riverside City Council meetings Karen Wright was escorted and handcuffed by the police on October 23, after she kept talking over the 3-minutes speaking rule. To call her attention was fine, but to handcuff her was outrageous, regrettable. Karen was taken to a police car and cited for "disrupting a public meeting," and was given a citation to appear in court. Minutes later, she was allowed to return to the chamber. Handcuffed? Gosh! First time such treatment has been used in the history of the Riverside Council meetings. What a grotesque and disgusting scene! City Attorney Greg Priamos denied he directed Officer Nick Sahagun to arrest Ms Wright at the chamber. (Photos by the web site http://www.thirtymilesofcorruption.com)CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Bank of America is sued by the U.S. for $1 billion for allegedly selling bad
loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

* A novel inspired from the real life.* President Obama writes to The Truth.* The Riverside election for Mayor.* The capture of a cop killer.* Loveridge says sayonara to City Hall.* Mitt Romney's cruelty to his dog.* The power of the mind.* Riverside deals with Communists.* Many more interesting stories.

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.

Sunday, October 7, 2012

While our publisher recovers his health, The Truth Publication Online will publish a novel based on realities of life and personal episodes of the characters, including the story of a touching romance. The whole drama ended in the City of Riverside.

THE NIGHT WAS LEFT BEHIND by El Vate.Charter 1

Tony was 24 years old when he met for the first time a beautiful girl by name Amparo, 19. The encounter took place at a modest party in the neighborhood of Tony. She was dancing with another man and he with another young woman.But, at the rhythm of tropical musical notes, they were not concentrating on their partners. Their eyes were crossing the air looking at each other like the moon watches the earth intensively.Eventually, they will see each other again because she was taking classes close to Tony's home. The mutual attraction was evident. She was tall, with a pretty green eyes and a curvaceous body. He was also tall, elegant, with a gorgeous black hair.A romance between the two was just a matter of time. They could not imagine the marvels of love, the happiness and the tragedies that were waiting for them, as the moon waits every night to caresses the flowers of our garden.But black clouds were appearing in the horizon, threatening love and freedom. Who could have imagined the whole drama will end up in the political arena of Riverside, California?Chapter IITony and Amparo were very happy. She was a teacher at an elementary school and he was a reporter for an important newspaper. But something was interfering with the couple lives: Amparo's mom.Amparo's mom was a very possessive person. She kept treating her daughter as a child. Every day she was showing up at the home of the couple, even making many calls during the honeymoon. It was a selfish and destructive intrusion, affecting the lives of Tony and his wife.Making the story short, Amparo's mom moved to the couple's home, and a few months later her husband too, Amparo's father. Tony and Amparo's privacy was history. Nevertheless, they loved each other very much and tried to deal with the situation.Unfortunately, politics affects the lives of people for good or for bad. A terrible thing happened in the country: Communism took over power, erasing freedom, happiness and well being. Democracy became tyranny. Happiness transform to sadness. Life translated to death.Then, what happened to Amparo and Tony's marriage?Chapter IIIThis story has several messages, one of them is about the damage that parents make on their grown sons and daughters when they treat them as if they still were infants. There have been thousands of jokes about "mothers-in-law," but in this case the joke is not funny at all because what happened to the marriage of Tony and Amparo.Yes, some times jokes become reality. Just read the following "jokes":

I haven't spoken to my mother-in-law for two years. We haven't quarreled. I just don't like to interrupt her.

What is the worst thing an emergency doctor can tell you after admitting your mother-in-law?"Sir, we were able to save her."The clock fell off the wall. If it was a minute sooner, it would have hit my mother-in-law. The clock was always slow. Well, being honest, Tony and Amparo's marriage troubles cannot be credited to her parents intrusion per say. Actually, it was the change in the political structure of the country the main cause of the end of a great romanceTony became an activist against the dictatorship. His life was reduced to zero and had no choice but to leave the country. Amparo's mother threatened her to commit suicide if she decided to come to the U.S. with her husband. Tony's life was in danger, and one day he could managed to escape the country in an American ship that was ankled in a harbor. Amparo opted to stay in the country with her parents, afraid of her mother's threats to kill herself. What a selfish behavior of the young woman's mother!(Chapter IV)Imagine for a second what is to be in a foreign country not knowing its language, being broke, and having no connections at all. Only a very strong character could survive those circumstances.The ship where Tony escaped from his country arrived at a Florida harbor. Tony and about two hundred more refugees were taken to Miami, where the Police and Jewish people rejected the new arrivals. Police were totally biased and abusive, and Jewish were telling them, "Go back to your country."Tony saw public bathrooms with signs, "For white people only." It was the year 1962. As always, it is just to mention exceptions. Of course, the Miami of today is not the one of the past. The refugees has made of the city a properous one, thanks to their hard work and wisdom. Not a pretty sight, anyhow.So, Tony went to New York, a crazy town with very tall buildings, where people are always in a hurry and nobody trust anybody. A very dangerous and liberal town. At that time, Tony was having breakfast, lunch and dinner around three o'clock in the afternoon: a hot dog and coffee with milk. In winter, temperature goes below 30 degrees.

But New York is an amazing city. No matter its millions of residents and tourists, a job could be found to provide food and shelter to a person in need, washing dishes, paling snow, cleaning buildings, whatever. Tony's heart was broken to pieces.Huge surprises were waiting for Tony in the Big Apple, some good, some bad.(Chapter V.)The International Rescue Committee helped refugees who were concentrating in Miami, a town with a very poor economic situation in the 1960s. So, the IRC started to allocate refugees in other cities.

"I cannot believe this ishappening to me."

Being in Manhattan, the IRC provided to Tony a week paid in a hotel and found a job for him. A heavy used coat was given to him, for protection from the very cold winter in the Big Apple. The hotel had a common bath, and neighbors with blue eyes were amazed that Tony took a shower every day, instead once a week as them. Tony was recommended to a small factory in Queens, and there he went not without falling several times on the iced streets because he didn't have the special rubber shoes to walk on ice. Finally, Tony had a job. The factory made envelopes out of disposal papers. A worker was assigned to train Tony in one machine. He was learning fast, but three hours after starting he was called to the office by the owner, who told him, "I'm very sorry but I have to let you go. I cannot explain why." All the workers at the factory were "Puertorricans," and they didn't want to have a co-worker from another origin. There was Tony, with a 3-hour check in his pocket, about $17.00, having two days left to live in the hotel. A very tough situation. The IRC committed to find just one job to the refugees. After that, they were on their own in the middle of a huge and cold monster.What happened to Tony next, who was missing his wife, his relatives and friends, his career,? The fact to be young give you stamina to overcome the great challenges of life. And that's exactly was what Tony did.(To be continued.)

CLICK ON "OLDER POSTS" AT THE BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE PAGES, TO SEE THE NEXT ONES.